Barriers and Enablers of Primary Healthcare Professionals in Health Research Engagement: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies.

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 NURSING Nursing & Health Sciences Pub Date : 2025-03-01 DOI:10.1111/nhs.70022
Mark Matheson, Ian W Skinner, Arianne Vehagen, Sean Mc Auliffe, Peter Malliaras
{"title":"Barriers and Enablers of Primary Healthcare Professionals in Health Research Engagement: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies.","authors":"Mark Matheson, Ian W Skinner, Arianne Vehagen, Sean Mc Auliffe, Peter Malliaras","doi":"10.1111/nhs.70022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Health professional engagement ensures relevant, clinically focused research that informs evidence-based care. Research shows health professionals may not engage optimally in research. Understanding barriers and enablers influencing participation is necessary to enhance engagement. This systematic review explores these factors among primary healthcare professionals. We searched peer-reviewed studies using CINAHL, Medline, and SCOPUS in February 2023, updated in June 2024. The review followed PRISMA and the ENTREQ checklist. Studies included those published in English, reporting factors influencing engagement among primary healthcare professionals. Qualitative data were extracted and thematically synthesized. Methodological quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist. Nineteen studies were included. Enablers include individual positive attitudes and a scholarly environment. Barriers include negative attitudes, an unconducive environment, and system constraints. Primary health professionals view research engagement positively, recognizing its potential to enhance health outcomes, professional growth, and business performance. Balancing clinical responsibilities, workload and research is challenging. Targeted strategies promoting partnerships and stakeholder involvement can foster a scholarly environment and empower research engagement.</p>","PeriodicalId":49730,"journal":{"name":"Nursing & Health Sciences","volume":"27 1","pages":"e70022"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11718354/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing & Health Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/nhs.70022","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Health professional engagement ensures relevant, clinically focused research that informs evidence-based care. Research shows health professionals may not engage optimally in research. Understanding barriers and enablers influencing participation is necessary to enhance engagement. This systematic review explores these factors among primary healthcare professionals. We searched peer-reviewed studies using CINAHL, Medline, and SCOPUS in February 2023, updated in June 2024. The review followed PRISMA and the ENTREQ checklist. Studies included those published in English, reporting factors influencing engagement among primary healthcare professionals. Qualitative data were extracted and thematically synthesized. Methodological quality was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist. Nineteen studies were included. Enablers include individual positive attitudes and a scholarly environment. Barriers include negative attitudes, an unconducive environment, and system constraints. Primary health professionals view research engagement positively, recognizing its potential to enhance health outcomes, professional growth, and business performance. Balancing clinical responsibilities, workload and research is challenging. Targeted strategies promoting partnerships and stakeholder involvement can foster a scholarly environment and empower research engagement.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
3.70%
发文量
91
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: NHS has a multidisciplinary focus and broad scope and a particular focus on the translation of research into clinical practice, inter-disciplinary and multidisciplinary work, primary health care, health promotion, health education, management of communicable and non-communicable diseases, implementation of technological innovations and inclusive multicultural approaches to health services and care.
期刊最新文献
Barriers and Enablers of Primary Healthcare Professionals in Health Research Engagement: A Systematic Review of Qualitative Studies. Development of a Questionnaire Assessing Nurses' Situational Awareness to Missed Care. Oral Health Care: A Systematic Review of Clinical Practice Guidelines. Exploring Health Sciences Students' Perspectives on Using Generative Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education: A Qualitative Study. The Effect of Nurses' Professional Values on Missed Nursing Care: The Mediating Role of Moral Sensitivity.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1